The Sky Is Falling Again
Um, never mind. On March 12, 1998, on the front page of The New York Times, a headline read: “Asteroid Is Expected to Make a Pass Close to Earth in 2028.” Brian G. Marsden, director of the Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, predicted that on October 26, 2028, an asteroid about a mile in diameter would come within 30,000 miles of Earth. That’s within spitting distance, spacewise, which evoked comparisons to the asteroid that crashed on the Yucatàn peninsula 65 million years ago, allegedly wiping out all the dinosaurs. “When you first discover a comet, or any kind of body, you start measuring its position,” notes Robert Park. “From that you extract its trajectory. The more measurements you make, the more accurate your trajectory gets.” Marsden issued his warnings based on very early trajectory measurements. Now he anticipates the asteroid will pass Earth at a safe distance of 600,000 miles.

Nuclear Winter of Our Discontent
In 1983, astronomer Carl Sagan coauthored an article in Science that shook the world: “Nuclear Winter: Global Consequences of Multiple Nuclear Explosions” warned that nuclear war could send a giant cloud of dust into the atmosphere that would cover the globe, blocking sunlight and invoking a climatic change similar to that which might have ended the existence of dinosaurs. Skeptical atmospheric scientists argued that Sagan’s model ignored a variety of factors, including the fact that the dust would have to reach the highest levels of the atmosphere not to be dissipated by rainfall. In a 1990 article in Science, Sagan and his original coauthors admitted that their initial temperature estimates were wrong. They concluded that an all-out nuclear war could reduce average temperatures at most by 36 degrees Fahrenheit in northern climes. The chilling effect, in other words, would be more of a nuclear autumn.

Piltdown Chicken
The finding was initially trumpeted as the missing link that proved birds evolved from dinosaurs. In 1999 a fossil smuggled out of China allegedly showing a dinosaur with birdlike plumage was displayed triumphantly at the National Geographic Society and written up in the society’s November magazine. Paleontologists were abuzz. Unfortunately, like the hominid skull with an ape jaw discovered in the Piltdown quarries of England in 1912, the whole thing turned out to be a hoax. The fossil apparently was the flight of fancy of a Chinese farmer who had rigged together bird bits and a meat-eater’s tail.

The “Archaeoraptor” fake

In 1999, a supposed ‘missing link’ fossil of an apparently feathered dinosaur named “Archaeoraptor liaoningensis“, found in Liaoning Province, northeastern China, turned out to be a forgery. Comparing the photograph of the specimen with another find, Chinese paleontologist Xu Xing came to the conclusion that it was composed of two portions of different fossil animals. His claim made National Geographic review their research and they too came to the same conclusion.[7] The bottom portion of the “Archaeoraptor” composite came from a legitimate feathered dromaeosaurid now known as Microraptor, and the upper portion from a previously-known primitive bird called Yanornis.

Editor’s note: I know that nonsense is spelled wrong. I hyphenated it for effect. Recently “global warming” has come to light as a complete hoax (post coming). Hoaxes, frauds and half-truths have been around since the fall of man from grace in the Garden of Eden. Today (the last 200 years), evil men diligently work towards enslaving you to take your money, your freedom and if possible your soul. You have a choice, either follow the truth or sell yourself into bondage.

This blog will continue to expose pseudo science. Make sure that you scrutinize all science that is contrary to GOD’s WORD. Take off your (if you are wearing them) evolutionary glasses and look at look at true science through GOD’s WORD and you will never be lead astray by hucksters who try to minimize GOD’s WORD which rightfully proclaims that HE created everything seen and unseen. The science says that there can be no other explanation. See Romans 1:20-23 if you are looking for an excuse.

Every known system degenerates. Metal rusts, food rots, and flowers wither. Even something as large as the universe will eventually run down. How much usable and still-ordered energy remains in the universe?

Australian researchers have generated a new estimate, one that includes the energy-destroying effects of “supermassive black holes.” Their computations indicate that the universe is perhaps 30 times more run down than similar estimates published just last year.

After adding in “the contributions of black holes 100 times larger than those considered in previous budgets,” co-authors Chas Egan and Charles Lineweaver reported in the Astrophysical Journal that the universe is at least an order of magnitude more run down than secular astronomers once thought.1

The largest contributor by far to universal entropy (a measure of usable energy) is generated by supermassive black holes, according to the published study. Evidence of these, as well as the smaller “stellar” black holes, has been found mostly in galactic cores. Black holes rapidly randomize ordered forms of energy and matter, turning them into heat that then dissipates.

Though some of the assumptions used in the Egan and Lineweaver study rely on aspects of Big Bang cosmology, a large portion of the computed entropy was derived from temperature and volume measurements or estimates. A host of other observations has demolished the Big Bang theory,2 but the very fact that the universe is slowing down is both counter to evolutionary assumptions and supportive of biblical creation.

Lineweaver said in an Australian National University press release, “Contrary to common opinion, the maintenance of all the complicated structures we see around us―galaxies, stars, hurricanes and kangaroos―have the net effect of increasing the disorder and entropy of the universe.”3 The longstanding scientific observation of continually decreasing order in all systems contradicts the evolutionary doctrine that order has spontaneously increased.4 But evolution’s simple-to-complex story has been so uncritically accepted that it isn’t surprising that the science of entropy, which calls that story into question, is not as well known.

Since the universe is currently unwinding through natural processes, it stands to reason that at some point it was intentionally “wound up” by something outside of the universe. This corresponds well with the Bible’s assertion that “in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”5

In fact, the culmination of the heavens wearing down was mentioned in the book of Isaiah, to whom God said, “Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.”6

Egan and Lineweaver suggested that future research could use their new numbers to recalculate how much time the universe has left. But failing to consider revelation from the God of creation must lead to confusion over the ultimate questions of origin and destiny. Whereas evolutionary scientists can be sure that the universe is running down—though unsure about when it started or how it will end—God states that “all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll,”7 “and the stars shall fall from heaven,”8 so that He can establish “new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”9 This present universal economy will be supernaturally restructured long before it fizzles out.

Biogenetic Law Fraud: Ernst Haeckel was actually called before a board of examiners and chastised for fudging the data. He proposed Biogenetic Law was supported with fraudulent pictures showing similarities of human embryos to those of fish, pig, chicken,etc. This was his attempt to demonstrate our common ancestry with animals. Although discredited 100 years ago, his drawings are still in some textbooks today.

Stem Cell Fraud: South Korean stem-cell researcher, Woo Suk Hwang, was “the centre of one of the largest investigations of scientific fraud in living memory.” Hwang was discredited by his own home research institution, Seoul National University, for presenting fraudulent data, Nature Reported. “The revelation has destroyed the best evidence so far that stem cells can be extracted from a clone matched to a specific patient. With Hwang discredited, both the field of therapeutic cloning and the public’s trust in science have suffered a serious setback.” Nature, 1-11-2006

Scientists Invent Results: Times Online (June 4, 2009) headline reports that “One in seven scientists say colleagues fake data.” That figure applies to serious breaches of “acceptable conduct by inventing results.” The article went on to say that “46 percent say that they have observed fellow scientists engage in ‘questionable practices‘, such as presenting data selectively or changing the conclusions of a study in response to pressure from a funding source.”

ClimateGate: Washington Times (Nov 20, 24, etc. 2009) reported on potential fraud relating to global warming turned up by hackers breaking into the e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UAE) in England. “Those e-mails involved communication among many scientific researchers and policy advocates with similar ideological positions all across the world. Those purported authorities were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global-warming claims.” If investigations confirm that climate data has been hidden which negates the currently “politically correct” global warming hysteria, as well as the attempt to silence the “dissenters,” this would likely become the biggest scandal ever perpetrated on the whole world.

Editor’s Note: These are just a small sampling of the plethora of “scientific” frauds that have been told and written over and over again. Creation-Facts will continue to expose these frauds a few at a time.

The above articles were taken from Think & Believe (January/February, 2010 Vol 28, No 1) newsletter written by Dave Nutting of Alpha Omega Institute of Grand Junction, CO.

A recent comprehensive analysis compared the human Y chromosome with the chimpanzee Y chromosome, and the researchers found that they were “remarkably divergent.”1

The Y chromosome is found only in males and contains many genes that specify male features, as well as genetic and regulatory information that is expressed throughout the whole body. In a study published in the January issue of Nature, a large team of scientists encountered so many unforeseen differences in the DNA sequences of the human and chimp Y chromosomes that the research took much longer than they had originally anticipated. Among their discoveries were interesting features unique to certain “sequence classes” within each chromosome.

Most of their findings do not fit well with the often-repeated erroneous statement that humans and chimps are 98 percent similar, nor with the more general hypothesis that they share a common ancestor.2 One sequence class within the chimpanzee Y chromosome had less than 10 percent similarity with the same class in the human Y chromosome, and vice versa. Another large class shared only half the similarities of the other species, and vice versa. And one whole class on the human Y chromosome “has no counterpart in the chimpanzee MSY [male-specific Y chromosome].”1

Under evolutionary assumptions of long and gradual genetic changes, the Y chromosome structures, layouts, genes, and other sequences should be much the same in both species, given the relatively short—according to the evolutionary timeline—six-million-year time span since chimpanzees and humans supposedly diverged from a common ancestor. Instead, the differences between the chromosomes are marked. R. Scott Hawley, a genetics researcher at the Stowers Institute in Kansas City who wasn’t involved in the research, told the Associated Press, “That result is astounding.”3

The Nature paper expressed the mismatch between this data and standard evolutionary interpretations in a more muted tone: “Indeed, at 6 million years of separation, the difference in MSY gene content in chimpanzee and human is more comparable to the difference in autosomal gene content in chicken and human, at 310 million years of separation.”1 Autosomes are the chromosomes other than the X and Y.

So, the human Y chromosome looks just as different from a chimp’s as the other human chromosomes do from a chicken’s. And to explain where all these differences between humans and chimps came from, believers in big-picture evolution are forced to invent stories of rapid wholesale rearrangements, and rapid generation of both new gene-containing and regulatory DNA.

But since each respective Y chromosome appears fully integrated and interdependent with its host organism, the most logical conclusion is that humans and chimpanzees were each specially created as distinct creatures.

Contrary to popular opinion, planets should not form from the mutual gravitational attraction of particles orbiting the sun. Orbiting particles are much more likely to be scattered or expelled by their gravitational interactions than they are to be pulled together. Experiments have shown that colliding particles almost always fragment rather than stick together. Similar difficulties relate to a moon forming from particles orbiting a planet.

Despite these problems, let us assume that pebble-size to moon-size particles somehow evolved. Growing a planet by many small collisions will produce an almost nonspinning planet, because a spin imparted by impacts will be largely self-canceling. Yet all planets spin, some much more than others.

The more we explore and understand our solar system, the more reasons we have to acknowledge that it did not evolve, but was created.

Science is learning how plants are designed to regulate carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Defination: carbon dioxide
–noun: a colorless, odorless, incombustible gas, CO2, present in the atmosphere and formed during respiration, usually obtained from coal, coke, or natural gas by combustion, from carbohydrates by fermentation, by reaction of acid with limestone or other carbonates, or naturally from springs: used extensively in industry as dry ice, or carbon dioxide snow, in carbonated beverages, fire extinguishers, etc.

Use by humans: Humans use carbon dioxide in many different ways. The most familiar example is its use in soft drinks and beer, to make them fizzy. Carbon dioxide released by baking powder or yeast makes cake batter rise.
Some fire extinguishers use carbon dioxide because it is denser than air. Carbon dioxide can blanket a fire, because of its heaviness. It prevents oxygen from getting to the fire and as a result, the burning material is deprived of the oxygen it needs to continue burning.

Carbon dioxide is also used in a technology called supercritical fluid extraction that is used to decaffeinate coffee. The solid form of carbon dioxide, commonly known as Dry Ice, is used in theatres to create stage fogs and make things like “magic potions” bubble.

First, when carbon dioxide levels go up, many plants increase their use of carbon dioxide, making more oxygen.

Second, at higher carbon dioxide levels, plants tend to make tissue that doesn’t decay as easily. This ties up the extra carbon for longer periods of time.

Our Creator expects us to take care of His creation. He knows, however, that we cannot control all of the possible changing conditions on planet Earth. For this reason He has built mechanisms into the creation that adjust to changing conditions and maintain a suitable habitat for human life.

One of the most fascinating and unique creatures of all creation is the common hummingbird. What is the probability that all of the unique characteristics of the ruby-throated hummingbird, each of which are needed for its survival, developed by some step-by-step evolutionary process? A few of the hummingbird’s incredible abilities are listed below:

1. The unique ability to fly forward, backward, upsidedown, and straight up like a helicopter as no other bird can.

2. The use of a special fringed tongue to sweep insects out from the inside of flowers. It cannot survive on nectar
alone, but also needs the protein from eating insects. Without its special tongue it could never catch the insects.

4. The ability to go into a “torpid” condition at night by almost shutting down its metabolism. Because of its incredibly high energy activity, gram for gram the hummingbird has the greatest energy output of any warm-blooded animal. Yet at night it uses only about one-fifth of its normal energy.

If you live in a climate where fall brings colors to the leaves before they fall, you’ve probably noticed something strange. Once the leaves start to fall, the ground is littered with their color. But among all those fading leaves, you might find a perfectly healthy looking green leaf. That green leaf is probably the work of one of God’s more amazing tiny insects.Several species of beetles, flies and moths go through a larval stage in which the larvae burrow into leaves. These leaf miners gain their nutrition from the leaf. But when fall comes, and the leaves lose their green chlorophyll, they stop making food for the larvae. So the larvae secrete a hormone that prevents the leaf from losing its chlorophyll and shutting down to die. This hormone enables a leaf to stay green and produce food for the larvae even long after the leaf would normally have turned color and dried up on the ground.

Leaf miners present several problems for those who think that mindless evolution produced the variety of life that we see around us today. How did the larvae learn to make just the right hormone to preserve the leaf on which it depends? Are we to believe that these larvae kept evolving from something else until one of them figured out the chemistry of the leaf? And finally, are we to believe that this unlikely evolutionary event happened in several species?
Just as the sprouting of new leaves in the spring means that summer is near, so the cleverness of the leaf miner should tell us that the hand of God created this insect. And we can reliably conclude that God made the entire creation.Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near. (Mark 13:28)

The fish known as the loose jaw or dragon fish has been found to have some remarkable abilities. At most 10 inches long, this deep-sea fish lives at depths between 1,500 and 4,500 feet. At these depths, the only light that gets through the water is a dim blue light. As a result, sighted creatures that live at those depths can see well in dim blue light, but virtually none of them can see light in the red end of the spectrum. None, that is, but the dragon fish, and that’s its secret weapon.

The dragon fish is the only known creature to have chlorophyll in its eyes. This compound gives the dragon fish the ability to see red light in the depths. But why would the dragon fish have these abilities if there is no red light to see? He makes his own red light. This bioluminescent red light is invisible to the dragon fish’s prey. But the dragon fish can see its red light reflecting off nearby prey, as a sniper who uses an infrared scope to sight his prey in the dark.

The dragon fish offers a powerful set of arguments in favor of a Creator. Its unique ability to see red where there is no red light cannot be explained by natural selection. Before it supposedly evolved the ability to see red light, how would it know about red light? And why would it have evolved the ability to create a color of light it could not have known about? The dragon fish’s sniper like ability to find its prey with light invisible to its prey bears powerful witness to a wise and powerful Designer.

As soon as a plant or animal dies, its DNA begins to decompose. The oldest accurately known DNA samples are from a 4000-year-old mummy. Based on the deterioration of the molecule from samples of this age, it is estimated that essentially no DNA could survive longer than 10,000 years. However, DNA segments have been found in magnolia leaves (dated by evolutionists at 17 million years), dinosaur bones (dated at 80 million years), scales of a fossilized fish (dated at 200 million years), and amber-encased insects and plants (dated at 25-120 million years). Evolutionary scientists should be asking how DNA could still be contained in samples this old when more recent samples indicate that the DNA molecule is far too sensitive to have lasted this long. Perhaps there is something wrong with the old-earth dating methods and these fossils still contain DNA fragments simply because they are not as old as believed. These samples have been simply been dated wrong due to faulty assumptions of radiometric dating methods.

Evolutionists have a similar problem with protein preserved in dinosaur bones. As with DNA, no protein should last 75 to 150 million years; yet protein has been found in dinosaur bones. These plant and animal remains are simply not as old as evolutionists need to accept in order to continue to believe in the story of evolution.